I think your article is too simplistic for the width of the topc. There is at present a huge fog and confussion around what is dominance, leadership, & positive and negative reinfocement and punishment. There is also confussion around what is acceptable correction methods and aversive methods.
Dominance and the Alpha Theory is grossly misunderstood, we have had to correct one of our Bassets we got from rescue, as part of the treatment, when she has done wrong she has had the water pistol, stood over and glared at and firm but calm rebuke, time out outside and ignored. When she is good dog she gets all the cuddles etc and all other training is positive reinforcement. In addition to this, which I don't think the dog will comprehend its significance is that we eat first, first through the door, off the furniture etc. to me these are just house rules and the dog will just accept it as such. Is this being dominant I would say not. They are just ground rules you would put down as a leader.
Acceptable correction / aversive methods. There seems to be mega confussion surrounding aversive methods of training and if you look on the net it is not being talked about, and if it is; its in a very negative manner. I feel a lot of people think it is a legacy from the Alpha Dominance theory from which they are trying to distance them selves from. Acceptable correction has got to be included in training since a dog has got know when a behaviour is not acceptable, but it also means that you
do not have to be cruel, consequently there needs to be debate on what is considered "humane" in the way of aceptable correction and when to apply it
Below is a seperate article
For new dog owners at the moment and the way we should train/treat our dogs is wholly confusing. Currently there are two schools of thought; there is the classic veiw of the alpha male and dominance theory, on which latest research has cast considerable doubt. This method appears to rely heavily on negative reinforcement, which has been said can create further problems down the line.
The other scenario is one of positive reinforcment where treats are awarded to the dog for doing things as they are asked and to entice. In this appraoch there appears to be no recourse to adverse treatment to correct the dog when it has done something wrong. The danger with this method given that it appears to be a softer approach; consequently if you are not careful, as an owner your dog starts demanding and wants to be leader rather than the otherway around.
Now we have had Belle and Beau (our Bassets) for a few months with a learning curve being a vertical line you begin to realise in practical terms once you get away from the disciples of extremes of the negative and positive you have to try to steer a path through the middle.
With Belle being a rescue we were holding back, and we were sort of waiting for someone to give us the green light to say its ok to challenge her, and resort to firm but fair treatment using aspects of negative reinforcement (ie body blocks, standing directly over her & the good old water pistol) so that she knows when she is misbehaving.
The flip side of the coin to the classic training methods where negative reinforcement has been used and aggression as manifested its self in a dog, I think problems may arise with too much positive reinforcement, where the dog assumes the role of leader, and bosses the owner, leading to bites and growls.
Sorry Steve I think you need to revisit it.